Page 5 | Campaign to remove prenatal tests

Wondermule · 2021-02-26T01:03:42+00:00

Posting in Feminism as from what I can see AIBU can get really nasty. I read this article a few weeks ago and it’s been playing on my mind ever since. [[https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/26/ken-ross-disabled-person-as-famous-as-brad-pitt-on-screen-down-syndrome]] Has the Guardian really given column inches to a MAN who is lobbying for prenatal tests to be withheld from women?! Not only that, it seems to be painting him in quite a positive light about it all! Just posting for other’s opinions really.

MangoFeverDream · 27/02/2021 13:15

Is it really surprising that 9 out 10 people don’t feel they have the money, time and resources to support a disabled child?

This is something commonly said, but it’s just not true and deflects from exploring some really uncomfortable issues.

I have to admit, I’d terminate if I had a diagnosis and have privately paid for the blood test to rule it out. It’s not that I don’t have the money or resources, it’s that I don’t want a child with DS. It feels monstrous to say aloud, but it’s the truth.

This is an excellent article about the current situation in Denmark, where only a dozen or so are born per year despite excellent care and support:

www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/12/the-last-children-of-down-syndrome/616928/

Whatsnewpussyhat · 27/02/2021 16:50

It's like any pro life campaigners though. They don't give a fuck what happens AFTER the child is born. Just they they are born.

WendyTestaburger · 27/02/2021 17:12

Maybe in a world of perfect testing, perfect information (and yet with perfect support too) very few babies with congenital disabilities would be born. I'm willing to bet it would not be zero due to the varying beliefs people hold, but that is not relevant to the argument.

Maybe an interesting sort of analogy would be adoption. In a perfect world no child would ever need to be taken into care. I could not, playing God, wish that trauma on any human. Yet if adoption didn't exist I would be without 5 members of my family. My family's life would be immeasurably different, and worse. That doesn't mean I don't work towards a future where no child needs to be taken into care though.

InTheShadowOfTheMushroomCloud · 27/02/2021 17:33

I gave birth to a child with SEN nearly 30 yrs ago. She had had a stroke before she was born, epilepsy and learning disabilities. She couldn't sit up at 12 months etc.

I gave up my career to look after her. I don't regret it as such but sometimes I wonder what life would've been like..

Until babies come out blokes cocks then they don't get to dictate anything that happens to our reproductive rights.

Whatsnewpussyhat · 27/02/2021 18:47

Maybe an interesting sort of analogy would be adoption. In a perfect world no child would ever need to be taken into care. I could not, playing God, wish that trauma on any human. Yet if adoption didn't exist I would be without 5 members of my family. My family's life would be immeasurably different, and worse. That doesn't mean I don't work towards a future where no child needs to be taken into care though

Without abortion though, I suspect there would be even more children in the care system.

Akela64 · 28/02/2021 11:49

The Atlantic article is very good and thought provoking. Thank you to the poster. At the end it very clearly showed the distortion gender ideology is having around treatment for intersex conditions. The writer had obviously not talked to a woman with Turners etc.

Women are born with all their potential offspring already created and stored in their ovaries. Is there a moral imperative that means I must facilitate the act of birth that changes potential to actual for any or all of these? I believe NO. My body. My choice. My right.

When we think about having kids (if, when and which) most think around having fulfilled lives (theirs and ours). Some barriers to fulfilled lives are social, but not all. If we develop the ability to gene edit a foetus with a genetic variation with risks of significant health and developmental impacts, would anyone argue against it? Argue that its a better choice for this child to be born with eg DS or XO, than without?

Helen8220 · 28/02/2021 12:22

While I completely agree with most of the objections expressed here to the article, I disagree that his view is irrelevant just because he’s male - I have never been pregnant, and I don’t expect to ever be (though I hope to be a parent), so I don’t see how my being female makes my view any more valid than his.

Tibtom · 28/02/2021 13:12

@Helen8220

While I completely agree with most of the objections expressed here to the article, I disagree that his view is irrelevant just because he’s male - I have never been pregnant, and I don’t expect to ever be (though I hope to be a parent), so I don’t see how my being female makes my view any more valid than his.

Because it is pregnant women who would be put at risk by this.

Whatsnewpussyhat · 28/02/2021 13:25

While I completely agree with most of the objections expressed here to the article, I disagree that his view is irrelevant just because he’s male - I have never been pregnant, and I don’t expect to ever be (though I hope to be a parent), so I don’t see how my being female makes my view any more valid than his

Only females as a sex class have the ability to be pregnant. Men can afford to spout bullshit because it has no effect on them or their health.
It's not about your individual opinion as a female, because there are many who agree with him, it's about all females as as sex class having the right to their own bodily autonomy. The right to choose either way.

ChattyLion · 28/02/2021 17:34

As a further action for anyone who feels strongly about this to take, you could perhaps either donate to the very important charity Antenatal Results and Choices and/or write to your MP to demand that the government gives grants to ARC to support and secure their essential work.

ARC is the only national charity helping parents and healthcare professionals through antenatal screening and its consequences (whatever the woman’s decision on the pregnancy).

More about them here www.arc-uk.org/

PotholeParadies · 28/02/2021 17:41

[quote ChattyLion]As a further action for anyone who feels strongly about this to take, you could perhaps either donate to the very important charity Antenatal Results and Choices and/or write to your MP to demand that the government gives grants to ARC to support and secure their essential work.

ARC is the only national charity helping parents and healthcare professionals through antenatal screening and its consequences (whatever the woman’s decision on the pregnancy).

More about them here www.arc-uk.org/[/quote]
Thank you for flagging them up. I'll be donating.

Original poster

Wondermule · 28/02/2021 17:45

@Helen8220

While I completely agree with most of the objections expressed here to the article, I disagree that his view is irrelevant just because he’s male - I have never been pregnant, and I don’t expect to ever be (though I hope to be a parent), so I don’t see how my being female makes my view any more valid than his.

Because you could become pregnant as a woman, and therefore need access to the tests. This man could never become pregnant, so would never even need the option.

OP posts:

Original poster

Wondermule · 28/02/2021 17:46

[quote ChattyLion]As a further action for anyone who feels strongly about this to take, you could perhaps either donate to the very important charity Antenatal Results and Choices and/or write to your MP to demand that the government gives grants to ARC to support and secure their essential work.

ARC is the only national charity helping parents and healthcare professionals through antenatal screening and its consequences (whatever the woman’s decision on the pregnancy).

More about them here www.arc-uk.org/[/quote]
Thank you, I will look into this as it is something I feel strongly about.

OP posts:

RaidersoftheLostAardvark · 28/02/2021 18:32

Apologies if this has already been raised, but I don't think we really say loudly enough that if you are a parent of a child with learning difficulties (and the average adult with Down's will have a similar IQ to a 7 year old without Down's) you have to consider who will care for them when you are too old or dead. I certainly would hate to bring a child into the world knowing they would be dependent on our social services when I can no longer care for them- I've seen the resulting neglect. Add the very high rate of Alzheimer's dementia (about 50% risk by the age of 50 yrs) and really why is anyone surprised at such a high termination rate?

Gurufloof · 28/02/2021 18:58

I have to admit, I’d terminate if I had a diagnosis and have privately paid for the blood test to rule it out. It’s not that I don’t have the
money or resources, it’s that I don’t want a child with DS. It feels monstrous to say aloud, but it’s the truth

Is that really monstrous? I'm of the same opinion and in general I dont think I'm a monster. I thought carefully about the many variations of disability that a child could be born with before getting pregnant.

I came to the pragmatic view that I simply could not cope with a severely disabled child and/or a life limiting disability.
Yes I realise anything could happen in the child's lifetime which could make this a possibility but I figured I'd cope as and when.
My main concern was a severely disabled child who would likely outlive me. I didnt know how to provide for its life after me if I couldn't work because of the disability.

FWIW men dont get a say unless and until they carry and give birth. Then stay home for years to care for the child, abled bodied or not.

Original poster

Wondermule · 28/02/2021 19:02

@RaidersoftheLostAardvark

Apologies if this has already been raised, but I don't think we really say loudly enough that if you are a parent of a child with learning difficulties (and the average adult with Down's will have a similar IQ to a 7 year old without Down's) you have to consider who will care for them when you are too old or dead. I certainly would hate to bring a child into the world knowing they would be dependent on our social services when I can no longer care for them- I've seen the resulting neglect. Add the very high rate of Alzheimer's dementia (about 50% risk by the age of 50 yrs) and really why is anyone surprised at such a high termination rate?

As I mentioned upthread, this would be my biggest fear - that they would have an unhappy adult life, and that their siblings would have to care for them at great personal expense.

It really isn’t something that is discussed, instead campaigners just show photos of very cute disabled babies and small children. Elderly disabled people seem to be hidden from the campaign material.

OP posts:

Hadalifeonce · 28/02/2021 20:07

As an older mother, I was in a high risk group. I also have a brother with learning difficulties. I remember telling my mother before my scan, very nervously, that if they found a severe problem with the baby I would abort it. I expected her to be really disappointed in me, her response? 'I don't blame you, I wouldn't wish my life on anybody!'
She died last year, and trying to support my brother is very, very hard.

Coyoacan · 28/02/2021 20:23

I read an article many years ago by a doctor who said that women have abortions out of maternal love and I have never forgotten it. Who would want to have a child with disabilities that you were not able to cater for? As as has already been said, if there are proper facilities to support the disabled, there will be fewer abortions.

SelkieQualia · 02/03/2021 06:29

Wondermule, you're right about the campaigners. I mean, of course they love their kids, and they want to show that, and of course anyone with a disability should be supported to live their best life. It's just that these best case stories are either very young kids, very wealthy, or unusually high functioning.